Sentences with phrase «of homosexual unions»

In this case, a «blessing» would signify an encouragement of homosexual unions.

If and when the church moves toward such liturgical recognition, it should also work for legal recognition of homosexual unions, involving such matters as tax laws and inheritance rights.

Blair omits the topic altogether, while Scanzoni and Mollenkott add only a brief postscript to their discussion, admitting that «for many Christians, the biggest barrier to accepting the possibility of homosexual unions pertains to an understanding of the creation accounts in chapters l, 2, and 5 of Genesis and in Jesus» commentary on them in Matthew, chapter 19.

Yet critics of homosexual unions overlook the extent to which our societies are addicted to sexualization and sentimentality and are inclined to excuse these factors in the case of heterosexuals.

To those seeking the legal recognition of homosexual unions, we respond «you don't want to do that.»

Not exact matches

Nevertheless, he decried, and actually seemed surprised by the fact that the jargon, presumptions, odor of sanctity, and especially the legal tools left over from the civil rights movement's glory years, now three generations past, are being used to sanction homosexual unions and in general make of non-heterosexuals yet another legally privileged group.

As every cause must have its antithesis, the movement has been greatly energized by radical feminist hostility to the family as an oppressive institution, and, more recently, by homosexual agitations to relativize the meaning of marriage and family by the formal recognition of same - sex unions.

This is dramatically clear in the movement to establish homosexual unions as an alternative kind of family.

He brings up women priests and bishops, the blessing of same - sex «unions» and «marriages» (he uses the quotation marks), and the ordination of homosexuals.

«Today's opinion dismantles the structure of constitutional law that has permitted a distinction to be made between heterosexual and homosexual unions, insofar as a formal recognition in marriage is concerned,» wrote Scalia.

It is precisely such a perspective that is needed in current debates on homosexuality and the issue of civil unions for homosexual persons.

Having uncovered the data of the natural law and the data of Revelation, we come full circle and consider again the question of civil unions for homosexual persons.

If the union between man and woman has strayed further and further from legal forms, and if homosexual unions are perceived more and more as enjoying the same standing as marriage, then we are truly facing a dissolution of the image of humankind bearing consequences that can only be extremely grave.

She had apparently got to the point where she honestly did not know that a child is the natural fruit of a union between a man and a woman: in her understanding «sex» is something done for pleasure, according to one's desires, whether lesbian or homosexual or whatever, and procreation an entirely different matter connected with options presented at various times, possibly involving in - vitro fertilization and test - tubes.

This is important for churches to consider, for parallel to the movement for homosexual civil unions is the movement to give blessings of churches to those unions.

The same is true of Muslims, Hispanics, Mormons, homosexuals, union members, and any group of people with whom we are not personally familiar.

He insisted that it be abandoned in favor of a «revisionist» view based on the state's interest in increasing «maximal experiential union» and therefore in approving homosexual unions.

Furthermore there is no rational argument for equating homosexual union, which is anatomically and physiologically dysfunctional and unproductive of new life, with heterosexual union.

«Writing the Ketubbà for males» means sanctioning homosexual union with a regime of legal and economic guarantees.

At another point, he writes that the «openness of the contract» between two homosexual males means that such a union will in fact be more durable than a heterosexual marriage because the contract contains an «understanding of the need for extramarital outlets» (emphasis added).

Persons choosing homosexual acts are not speaking the «language of the body,» in which the body itself is integral to their union as bodily beings.

There follow verbose passages about union, mutual love, and support, etc., sentiments one finds in romantic poetry and in the sincere expressions of homosexual lovers for each other.

But he leaves no doubt that such unions are but one of innumerable choices homosexuals might make in the pursuit of «sexual adventure and passion and experimentation.»

The Catholic World Report asked Cardinal Burke how important he thought it was that Pope Francis should «make a statement soon in order to address the growing sense — among many in the media and in the pews — that the Church is on the cusp of changing her teaching on various essential points regarding marriage, «remarriage», reception of Communion, and even the place of «unions» among homosexuals».

Needless to say, such an understanding of love also involves life - long monogamous fidelity andrules out homosexual unions.

Then, homosexual «marriage», lesbianism, the infidelity which follows from the division of sexual union from spiritual and life - long love, etc. etc..

On the contrary, even Karl Barth, who uncompromisingly rejects homosexual partnerships as out of step with the Creator's intention, writes that such unions are often «redolent of sanctity» (Church Dogmatics III / 4, p. 166) because they are about the struggle to give and receive love.

Here's another, scarcely less oratorical in character, from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith: the title of this document (another wonderful example of Vatican bogus academic language when what is needed is a competent journalist used to writing informative headlines) is «Considerations regarding proposals to give legal recognition to unions between homosexual persons» (2003): The Church's teaching on marriage and on the complementarity of the sexes reiterates a truth that is evident to right reason and recognised as such by all the major cultures of the world.

«Among the many errors and ambiguities of this book,» concludes the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, «are its positions on masturbation, homosexual acts, homosexual unions, the indissolubility of marriage and the problem of divorce and remarriage.»

While the group «affirm that God has designed marriage to be a covenantal, sexual, procreative, lifelong union of one man and one woman, as husband and wife, and is meant to signify the covenant love between Christ and his bride the church», they «deny that God has designed marriage to be a homosexual, polygamous, or polyamorous relationship».

What we often neglect to say: The statistics cited in 1999 in support of civil unions (the PACS) were grossly exaggerated, and this practice continues in the case of homosexual marriage.

What we often neglect to say: Statistics cited in 1999 in support of civil unions (the PACS) were grossly exaggerated, and this practice continues now in the case of homosexual marriage.

What we often neglect to say: The lesbian and feminist association «The Well Born» («Les Bien Nées») indicates on its website the four forms that homosexual parenting would take following its legal authorization: «It can be the result of a family's recomposition with a partner of the same sex following a heterosexual union.

Why do those who reject marriage and prefer free unions demonstrate alongside activists in favor of homosexual marriage?

Why do those who reject marriage and prefer free unions demonstrate alongside LGBT activists in favor of homosexual marriage?

And I wish especially to emphasize that in the framework of civil unions already in place in France, there is no reason that our concern for protecting partners would cause us to put in question the institution of marriage in the radical way implied by the authorization of homosexual marriage.

With this aim in mind, homosexual marriage and the right to adoption for same - sex couples appear as nothing more than a means for exploding the foundations of society, making possible all kinds of unions, finally liberated from an ancestral morality, and therefore definitively doing away with the very notion of sexual difference.

In a blog post entitled, «The Tornado, The Lutherans, and Homosexuality,» Piper confidently proclaims that the tornado that hit downtown Minneapolis yesterday was a result of divine judgment on a group of Lutherans meeting in a local church to discuss, among other things, a «social statement» that could make it easier for the church to accept homosexual unions.

The first strength of this show at the Mercer Union is that it rethinks all kinds of histories — native, female, homosexual and, most crucially, artistic.

As President Obama today expressed his support for gay marriage, the State of Florida continues to define marriage as «a legal union between one man and one woman,» leaving homosexuals in loving relationships in a state of legal limbo.

President Barack Obama is officially opposed to same - sex marriage, although he supports «full civil unions and federal rights» for homosexual couples and a full repeal of DOMA, and called California's Proposition 8 outlawing same - sex marriage in 2008 «unnecessary.»